Sunday, May 15, 2016

Obscure Pregnancy Reference

Juno is one of those movies for me. I’ve been a little scared of it for some time because I figured it probably couldn’t live up to its hype. People seem to like it a little too much for what it is. It’s a teen pregnancy comedy, at least on the surface, and it was nominated for four major Oscars, winning one (original screenplay). Sure, it’s got a solid cast and a lot to recommend it, but I struggled with the idea that it could be the sort of end-all, be-all that everyone seems to think it is.

Juno MacGuff (Ellen Page), a 16-year-old high school student, gets pregnant one night thanks to her best friend/love interest Paulie Bleeker (Michael Cera). Initially intent on getting an abortion, Juno instead decides to have the baby and put it up for adoption. With the aid of her friend Leah (Olivia Thirlby), Juno finds Vanessa and Mark Loring (Jennifer Garner and Jason Bateman), a local couple who would love to adopt her child. At least that’s what they think initially. After all, there wouldn’t be a movie if there weren’t some problems along the way.

Really, though, that is the main plot. Juno’s parents are the most relaxed grandparents-to-be in movie history. While neither her father Mac (J.K. Simmons) nor her step-mother Bren (Allison Janney) are pleased with Juno’s pregnancy, they decide that the best thing to do is to support her in the decision. Sadly, neither of them fit into the overall story too much. Bren has a couple of good scenes (like when Juno gets an ultrasound) and Mac is clearly the most supportive father in human history, but they are supporting characters in the truest sense. They are great additions to the story, but completely tangential to the plot.

Really, the story is about Juno’s relationships, and primarily her relationships with Bleeker and with the Lorings. Juno and Bleeker rather clearly and awkwardly love each other but are also completely unwilling to make that a thing between them. Juno seems to want Bleeker hands-off with her pregnancy and Bleeker seems to just want things to go back to the way they were and also seems to be sure that they can’t. In fact, Juno’s relationship with Bleeker seems to be much more about her in the context of the film. While he is clearly important in the overall narrative, we don’t actually get much about him. We don’t know his opinion on whether or not Juno should have the baby or what.

The Lorings are a lot more interesting in that respect. Initially, Juno bonds with Mark. Mark used to play in a band and lived sort of a wild and crazy life. Now he writes jingles for advertising. He likes the same kind of gory horror movies Juno favors and the two argue about the relative merits of different bands. Vanessa seems almost oppressive early on, desperately wanting a child more than anything and determined to paint herself as the perfect prospective mother. It’s not until Juno sees her playing with a child at the mall that Juno realizes Vanessa is the person she wants taking care of her child. Of course, part of the reason Juno bonds with Mark has a case of (wait for it!) arrested development, and isn’t sure that being a parent is everything he wants to be.

The biggest bright spot is simultaneously the biggest problem with Juno, and it’s Juno herself. She is far too self-aware as a 16-year-old. She is far too capable of making references to obscure things that only the rarest of people several years older could make. She is less a character and more a bundle of different quirks loosely tied together in a pregnant body. Sure, that’s the draw of the character, but it’s also the thing that makes the character unbelievable to me.

“But Steve,” I hear you say, “Why couldn’t there be this sort of completely precocious character wandering around out there?” Oh, I suppose there could. But here’s the thing—I live with an extremely precocious 17-year-old. This is a kid who left high school two years early and is pulling close to a 4.0 as a college junior. Someone with her own set of quirks (like all of us), able to make a few obscure references of her own, and I defy her to make a comment involving Soupy Sales or Dario Argento. Juno is too much a character, too much a platform for witty banter and the perfect line, and that makes it difficult for me to accept her as anything but a tightly-written movie character.

No, for me the real stars of this film are J.K. Simmons and Allison Janney, both of whom I would happily watch in just about anything. Janney is a wonder tearing a new asshole into the ultrasound tech and is marvelously entertaining on screen. Simmons makes as much as he can out of a role that in many ways is as overwritten as Juno’s.

So, ultimately, the truth is that Juno didn’t live up to the hype. Don’t get me wrong; it’s good. I’d watch it again. But honestly, there are plenty of other movies I’d probably want to watch first instead.

Why to watch Juno: J.K. Simmons and Allison Janney are completely underrated.
Why not to watch: It relies too much on quirky.

15 comments:

I felt the same way after seeing this in the theatre. It didn't help that I don't quite get the appeal of Ellen Page, she's an okay actress but I see nothing special about her and at the time she was being praised to the skies. On the other hand I'm completely mystified by the continued employment of Michael Cera, one of the dullest lumps of nothing I've seen in years. Garner and Bateman were fine as the couple but their situation seemed contrived to me.

However I could have watched an entire series of movies about the parents as long as J.K. Simmons and Allison Janney played them. It's not just that they are wonderful separately but they were brilliant as a couple.

If you need a reason to praise Ellen Page, watch Hard Candy, which is a tight little thriller. I love her in that. I agree with you on Michael Cera. I really don't get the appeal. I suppose he could make it work in a Wes Anderson film--he always seems like a Wes Anderson reject to me anyway.

Someone should write a movie specifically to star J.K. Simmons and Allison Janney as parents. Jeez, I would watch the hell out of that. They were perfect as an on-screen couple.

I think I like it slightly more than you, bit I was never in the camp that thought it was the greatest thing ever. Completely agree on Simmons and Janney. I also really love Page's performance, but yeah, her actual character is too much to take at times.

I don't have a huge objection to Ellen Page's performance, but I tired of the character quickly. She was more or less pregnant Daria (and I wish to hell I'd thought of that reference when I wrote this). Daria worked because she was a cartoon. The real-life version is far more annoying.

It's perhaps a cliche to get Michael Cera mixed up with Jesse Eisenberg since they started out at the same time and have some surface similarity. These days, I sort them out by remembering that Eisenberg is the one with talent.

Haven't and likely won't for some time. I'm completely burned out on superhero movies at the moment. I can't work up any enthusiasm for any of them. I was moderately pumped for Suicide Squad a couple of months ago, but don't care about that one now, either.

Eisenberg is terrible as Luthor. It's not entirely his fault because the script is gibberish. But most of the actors were good in their roles despite all the ridiculous crap they were saying and doing. (I felt bad for them.) Eisenberg was just awful. I could hardly believe my eyes.

I remember seeing Juno in the theaters and really enjoying it. What's strange is that I haven't been interested in watching it again. Its success has diminished in my mind without even doing a second viewing. It's hard to say if I've just changed or the general negative feelings about Jason Reitman have affected me. It's a weird one. I'm pretty much on board with your reaction. It's almost too clever for its own good.

Just saw it tonight, and I'll argue against your main complaint, in that it seems like you're judging it for not being something it's not *trying* to be. Juno's character is obviously not written to be a realistic 16-year-old. Why hold her to a standard that the writer didn't intend? That sort of feels like holding Hudson Hawk to the fire for not being another Die Hard, when it more likely was aiming for “live action Warner Bros. cartoon, with Bruce Willis as Bugs Bunny.”

Also, the “most supportive father in human history” award probably needs to go to Stanley Tucci in Easy A, ;) …but I agree — I'll gladly watch JK and CJ in just about anything.

Followers

About Me

I'm a father of two, married for more than 25 years. I teach English composition and other subjects at the college level and freelance as a copy editor and proofreader--something now supplemented with basic design and layout at the behest of my talented and very busy wife. I have an M.A. in linguistics and have written a scad of books (all non-fiction). I love movies, and watch several every week. My love of movies and a desire to review them has led me to create this page.
Please feel free to contact me at sjhoneywell(at)comcast.net